Howard Dean on the FairTax proposal

I got a chance to ask Howard Dean about the FairTax at the Democratic debate in Des Moines August 19th. He says he wants to get a whole bunch of stuff in writing. Anyone up for a letter writing campaign?
Howard Dean c/o
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• FairTax
• Democratic
• Howard
• Dean

[DavidFL10]

You are equating wealth with reported income. They are very diffent things. If a person makes ten million dollars in a year, and lives on twenty thousand so that he can grow his business, why do you want to punish him for that decision?

I am more inclined to want to tax the person who makes nearly nothing, but spends a fortune of family money or the person whose income is mostly cash and goes unreported on his tax forms.

[DavidFL10]

Disk, the comment section here is very limiting for a discussion. To send me an email, my name is DavidN, the server is TampaBayFairTax and we are a non profit org.

[DavidFL10]

Disk,

You are ill-informed if you think the Beacon Hill Institute is some shill organization that is willing to "spin" the data to promote the FairTax.

They are a highly respected independent collection of economists. They conclude that 91% of Americans will be better off under the FairTax, and the ones who are worse off lose around 1% of utility.

You cherry picked one paragraph that seems to say otherwise and ignored the intro that said this calculation ignores class migration.

[DavidFL10]

By the way, Paris Hilton spends FAR more than she makes, and what she does make is either tax free interest on municipal bonds or taxed at the 15% capital gains rate. Nor are there payroll taxes witheld from Ms. Hilton's income.

[DavidFL10]

Furthermore, this study assumed complete honesty in filing under the current law. We all know that the more a person makes, the more chance there is to hide some of that income. There are more people in America who spend more than they claim to make than actually make a lot more than they spend.

When advocating for the income tax, Teddy Roosevelt warned that "the least desirable of all taxes is the tax which bears heavily upon the honest as compared with the dishonest man."

[DavidFL10]

The results are reported on the last line of Table 14 and show that 91 percent of households will be better off over their lifetimes as a result of the FairTax. Even the losers would not lose by much; of the 10,000 cases, the biggest loser would see his or her utility fall by just 1.1 percent.

Moreover, households in all income classes, on average, experience an increase in lifetime utility under the FairTax when compared to the benchmark.

[1969was1969]

By Americans for Fair Taxation's own research and admissions, the "Fair" Tax would raise the average federal taxes paid by those in the $15,000 to $150,000 income range and lower the taxes of those who make more than $150,000. They then try to claim those people will still be better off, by "income mobility"-- however, that mobility is by them falling into the <$15,000 income range-- not something most would call "better off".

It is a very, very bad idea that fortunately will never be enacted.

[1969was1969]

Hopefully by now the video poster DavidFL10 has come to realize just how BHI fudges the data in the research to claim that the middleclasses are "gainers". To anyone who does not know, go to the research at tinyurl 593htl, page 30 on, and pay careful attention to Table 13 years 7-8 and 15-16. Hint: they claim the middleclasses ($15k to $150k) will be "gainers" by "income mobility", however, they have them "gain" by falling into poverty every few years.

[FairTaxisaLie]

From BHI/fairtax:"Households in the lowest income band,with an adj. gross income (AGI) of less than $10,000 annually, would benefit because they would receive the prebate that would more than offset any higher cost of purchasing goods. Households in the top income cat.,with more than $150,000 in annual income, would also gain as they do not have to pay their highest marginal tax rates. Mid-income cat. households would lose because the FairTax would impose a relatively higher tax rate on them.

[FairTaxisaLie]

The "Fair" Tax aka national Sales Tax- Inclusive aka NASTI would on average raise the federal taxes of those making from $15k-$150k a year while lowering the fed taxes of those making over $150k a year. This is not debateable, it is from supporters' own site and "research".

How do they claim the middle classes will still be better off, then? By asserting that if one's income drops from $35k to $10k a year, one is better off. Does any sensible person think that way? tinyurl 593htl, table 13.

[KenMacMillan]

It doesn't matter what kind of tax they give us, they will find a way to game the system into their advantage. Eventually they will decide to tax one item at a higher rate than another & before you know it it's 70% for gas like in England. The best thing to do is to remove all federal taxes completely & assign them a flat percentage paid by each state per quarter. Also, with state taxes we'd get taxed twice on everything we buy.

[12FlyMe]

@scenesonn Research it -- great. Compare reality to their bogus insane shit promises.

Read the wall street journal about it. Read those who have exposed their farce. It's not even a real tax plan.

Oh -- any discussion of Fairtax SHOULD use extreme language, but it's a bunch of shit. It's not a real tax plan, it's leaders know its BS and are not trying to pass it.

I will send you some places to "research it"

[scenesonn]

@12FlyMe I will definitely being researching it more. For future reference, you need to learn how to make an argument without swearing, because you sound like an idiot.

Cheers

[12FlyMe]

@DavidFL10 wrong idiot, they didnt conclude anything at all. They were paid to hawk this shit. Their math is goofy and laughable.

Mostly, they don't believe their own shit. They do not support this unlesss Fairtax sends them money. And even then, they don't really support it.

The only REAL research done on National sales tax to replace all others -- show the actual tax rate would be 60-90%.